Lauren Farello and Josh Footlik

      The famous Star Trek mantra claims that its mission it to "explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before."  For many, Star Trek and the introduction of human exploration on the moon has created a sense of wonder and awe amongst many Americans.  For decades, billions of dollars have been put forth by the government in order to further the quest for knowledge about space.  However, because of the public's uncertainty of space and its possibilities, the funding of space exploration has become a controversy in today's society.  When examining how much money should be spent on space as compared to other government-funded programs, it is imperative to consider the cost to taxpayers as well as the minor underlying issues such as its repercussions.  
 

    Although seemingly inexpensive, space exploration is a costly and time-consuming project.  Researchers and scientists often spend years in order to develop new technologies in order to further knowledge about what lies beyond the stars.  In terms of money, according to Source C, each dollar of American tax money is divide amongst various federally-funded programs.  Space and Technology receives approximately $0.06 to every dollar spent (Source C).  However, this portion of the money is also split amongst eleven different programs, so the entire dividend is not  solely for the purpose of space exploration.  Some believe that this money is going towards a future investment, one that could change the world.  As Source A states, "...the manned space exploration program is absolutely worth the cost."  The proponents of the space program see it as a precursor to benefit Earth in the future.  Source A argues that this money, although it does come from taxpayer dollars, "disperses throughout the economy in the same way as money spent  on...any other activity we engage in with government or even private spending."  Nonetheless, many opponents of federal funding of space exploration debate that the money spent towards this project could be better suited for the American people.  Source H proclaims, "As much as I like space and the idea of people on Mars, I don't see the case for using taxpayer money to get it done...Leave the money here on earth."  Although people may support the idea of exploring space and other planets, it is not the desire of many to use hard-earned money to do it.  Therein lies the controversy.  Should Americans be forced to give their money to fund NASA or should their money be spent on something that will directly affect them?

 

    Within the element of space exploration come the possible intended and unintended results that may follow. Just as humans are unfamiliar with space itself, they are also unfamiliar with the possibilities that may come as a result of continued space exploration.  These issues must be considered when thinking about future endeavors into space.  One possible repercussion may come from extraterrestrial life and what may happen in its exposure to humans.  Just as the Spanish came to South America in the sixteenth century and brought unprecedented diseases and killed many natives, the same is possible with human exploration in space.  Source F warns of "back contamination", in which space crews bring back an infectious foreign germ that has never been seen before on Earth.  On the other hand, there is also a worry that humans will bring new germs to life on other planets.  "Forward contamination- that is, the infection of alien ecosystems by terrestrial organisms hitchhiking on a spacecraft- is a distinct possibility" (Source F).  Being that space exploration could potentially be more damaging than it would be beneficial is something to take into serious consideration when debating on whether or not to fund scientific advancements for outer space.  However, not all space exploration consequences are negative.  Because every nation and its constituents can gaze up at the same sky and admire its beauty and wonder, space is something that can unify people from all over the world.  Source H claims that if world leaders could see Earth from thousands of miles away, then their view and perspective would be changed drastically because there would be no borders ans no separation between people and nations.  The narrator states that the world would be seen from a whole new perspective, and that it would cause these political figures to think of "solutions to their problems that would benefit the entire globe, not simply their own natural interests" (Source H). Through space, we would discover unprecedented results, some of which may be beneficial, and others that may be detrimental to the human race. 

 

    Human curiosity is boundless. Wherever or whenever there is an unknown, not far behind will be an effort to understand and comprehend what that unknown is. The vast depths of space are no exception. Human beings will stare up to the stars and question what lies beyond them. But these dreams of a new day come at a price. The cost of space exploration and the possible results/repercussions give the American people skepticism of whether or not the "final frontier" should be explored. Despite this dichotomy of opinion, one can still only dream "to boldly go where no one has gone before."